R. Gnanasundari v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL.O.P.No.398 of 2026 R.Gnanasundari ... Petitioner

Versus

The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Land Grabbing Cell - III, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.

(Crime No.124 of 2025) .. Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.124 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :

Mr.Shabeer Ali For Respondent :

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.124 of 2025 registered on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/6

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that she is arrayed as A3 in the present case and that she is the wife of A2. It is alleged that the original owner of the property was one Paradesi Singh, the grandfather of the defacto complainant, and that A4 and A7 are also among the legal heirs of the said original owner. It is further alleged that, by impersonating the defacto complainant and by engaging A1 as an impersonator, A2 fraudulently obtained the property in his favour. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged and the present case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2006 and that A2 is no more. He further submitted that the petitioner has been added as an accused, that she has not derived any benefit from the alleged occurrence, and that she is not a party to any of the documents. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the allegations involve impersonation and cheating of the defacto complainant of his lawful share. He further submitted that the investigation in the case is still pending. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned 2/6

Government Advocate (Crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2006, that the petitioner is a lady, and that no property was obtained in her name pursuant to the alleged transaction, and that she is stated to have derived some property only after the death of A2, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen

(15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Ponneri, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the 3/6

respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 21.01.2026 drl To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Ponneri.

2. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Land Grabbing Cell - III, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4/6

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

drl CRL.O.P.No.398 of 2026 5/6

21.01.2026 6/6